Are gun-free nations or “zones” safer?
Gun-free nations are safer—at least for folks like Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin, Castro, Pol Pot and Saddam, all of whom disarmed their detractors before slaughtering them by the tens of millions. History records the consequences of disarming people, both in terms of protection, in their person and property, from tyrannical governments and from criminals.
Thomas Jefferson understood that maxim. In his Commonplace Book, Jefferson says, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
This is Jefferson, the paragon of personal freedom!
The same can be said of so-called “gun-free zones” in America, as on the campus of Virginia Tech.
“Virginia Tech has a very sound policy”
In 2002, at the Appalachian School of Law just up the road from Virginia Tech, a Nigerian student, who had flunked out, returned to campus, murdered three people and wounded three others. Fortunately, his killing spree was interrupted by two students who had retrieved handguns from their vehicles and held the murderer at gunpoint until police arrived.
In 1997, an assistant principal in Pearl, Mississippi, retrieved a handgun from his car and apprehended a murderer. A few days later, a copycat assault in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, ended after a nearby merchant wielding a shotgun forced the attacker to surrender. Off campus, it is estimated conservatively that gun owners use their weapons defensively more than 1.3 million times each year.
With that as a backdrop, last spring Virginia Tech admonished a student for having a handgun on campus—never mind that the student had a state-issued concealed-carry permit.
That admonishment was a motivating factor behind a proposed bill before the Virginia legislature to prevent academic institutions from enacting “rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed-handgun permit... from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun.”
When the legislation died in committee, prompting Tech’s associate vice president, Larry Hincker, to praise the General Assembly in an op-ed: “I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus. We believe guns don’t belong in the classroom. In an academic environment, we believe you should be free from fear.”
A month later, there was a murder near Tech’s campus, prompting a lockdown.
In response, Tech grad student Bradford Wiles penned an op-ed in the campus paper calling on the school to allow those with concealed-carry permits to carry guns on campus should they choose.
Larry Hincker emerged again, protesting, “[I]t is absolutely mind-boggling to see the opinions of Bradford Wiles. Surely, [the editors] scratched their heads saying, ‘I can’t believe he really wants to say that.’ Guns don’t belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same.”
Congratulations Mr. Hinkler. Your “sound policy” created a “safe campus” for only one student—Cho Seung-Hui—who was able to slaughter 32 people without interruption.
Welcome To crustybeef~
This article was sent to me by a fellow reader, UD...
UD, would you please inform us where you found it, as it proves a very good point.